The ‘Pondering:…’ column is where people from within the ‘Team of 40,000 Baptists’ can share issues they are thinking about in a way that opens up a topic from a particular perspective. Feel free to comment on these pieces on Facebook or our new Mailbox or contribute your own pondering. Opinion pieces are the views of individuals and need to be considered within the context of the diversity of our union of Baptist churches in New Zealand. When commenting or contributing, please follow our Guidelines for articles, opinion pieces and online comments.
Dave Tims is the Director of Urban Neighbours of Hope (UNOH). He also works with Arotahi in their Orbit network, creating intentional community spaces. Dave lives in Manurewa, Auckland.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God
- Matthew 5:9
I feel it’s important to delve deeper into why I don’t support the Treaty of Waitangi Principles Bill. This bill, introduced by ACT Party leader David Seymour, has created significant controversy and distress among New Zealanders, both Māori and non-Māori. To explain my position, I’ve drawn from the insights of lawyer Riana Te Ngahue (Ngāti Porou) Kaikawe Matua (Senior Advisor) at Kawea Law & Consultancy, former New Zealand Prime Minister Dame Jenny Shipley, Kassie Hartendorp (Ngāti Raukawa), Director of ActionStation and some comments from two of my UNOH Board members Frank Walton and Mal Green, who all provide valuable perspectives on this complex issue.
Riana Te Ngahue offers a succinct yet profound explanation of the Treaty’s intricacies. At its core, the Treaty of Waitangi exists in two versions: one in Māori and one in English. The Māori version, which most Māori chiefs signed, emphasises tino rangatiratanga. This term is a deeply rooted cultural concept that signifies self-determination and maintaining authority over one’s affairs. In contrast, the English version suggests that Māori chiefs ceded all power to Queen Victoria while allowing Māori to retain their possessions and gain the rights of British subjects. Historically, the Crown disregarded both versions, leading to severe injustices such as land confiscations and the suppression of Māori language and culture. These actions necessitated the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal, a body tasked with addressing these historical grievances and finding a middle ground between the two versions of the Treaty.
As my UNOH Chair Mal Green reminded me, within “a few years of signing Te Tiriti, the minority, immigrant, colonisers instituted systematic aggressive assimilation of the first people to arrive in Aotearoa (therefore the indigenous people, Māori) through war, disease, confiscation of life-supporting resources, suppression of appropriate medical care, etc. But in the past five decades, there has been a welcome and long overdue move by most Pākehā and Māori to work together to redress 140 years of failure of the representatives of the Crown (i.e. the New Zealand colonial government) to honour the treaty.”
This effort resulted in the development of the Treaty principles, which include partnership, protection, and acting in good faith (participation). These principles were not arbitrarily chosen; they are the result of extensive deliberation by legal experts, historians, and Māori leaders. Riana points out that David Seymour’s interpretation of tino rangatiratanga as a universal concept applicable to everyone dilutes its cultural significance, effectively undermining Māori rights and their unique perspective.[1]
Former Prime Minister Dame Jenny Shipley expresses grave concerns about the ACT Party’s attempt to define these principles legally. She warns that such a move could lead to significant division within New Zealand. According to Dame Jenny, the Treaty represents an enduring relationship between Māori and non-Māori. It is a contract that should not be unilaterally rewritten to suit political agendas. She recalls historical moments like Bastion Point, where the Treaty served as a guiding framework to navigate conflicts and find a way forward. Shipley argues that politicising the Treaty for political gain risks inviting conflict and undermines the progress New Zealand has made in addressing past wrongs. She stresses that the Treaty is a gift that invites us to work together, respecting each other’s rights and interests while striving to be citizens together.[2]
Kassie Hartendorp (Ngāti Raukawa), Director of ActionStation, states, “The true intention of this Bill is to remove the ability for Māori to act as a sovereign people now, and into the future. The proposed principles remove the words 'tino rangatiratanga' which was the heart of Te Tiriti o Waitangi - the full, collective authority for Māori to determine their own lives according to their laws and ways of being. While there is a nod towards Te Tiriti and the settlement process at the time of signing - this is a deliberate attempt to freeze the Te Tiriti relationship in time and, crucially, will prevent Māori authority from growing into the future.
The Bill is divisive because it will make it almost impossible to legally do what was guaranteed in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. While the original document of Te Tiriti itself is not being changed, the Treaty Principles decide how Te Tiriti is enacted in law.” [3]
In my view, the Treaty of Waitangi was established to address the coexistence of two distinct peoples—Māori and non-Māori—on the same land. It respects the mana of both groups, allowing Māori to live as Māori and non-Māori to live as non-Māori. The Treaty provides a framework for partnership and negotiation, recognising our different worldviews, values, languages, and cultures. It allows a space for both groups to coexist (I believe in co-governance and co-management, but that’s another story), which was gracefully granted to us by Māori, with the understanding that it upheld Māori sovereignty. It is not about creating a homogenous society under one government, as David Seymour’s bill suggests. His proposal for a public vote on the Treaty principles oversimplifies a complex historical agreement and disregards the unique relationship the Treaty fosters.
The Treaty is not merely a historical artefact; it is a living document that guides our interactions today. It acknowledges that while we share the same land, we come from different cultural backgrounds and have a different worldview (ways of life). The principles of the Treaty have been painstakingly developed to ensure that both Māori and non-Māori can coexist and thrive in a manner that respects each other’s rights and dignity. By attempting to redefine these principles in a way that negates the cultural and historical context, Seymour’s bill risks undermining the very foundation of our shared journey in Aotearoa.
My friend and UNOH Board Member, Frank Walton (pākehā), adds, “The treaty is our foundational document, protecting the rights of both Māori and non-Māori, providing the basis of a relationship of mutual respect and good faith. For non-Māori, as tangata tiriti (people of the treaty), they (we/me) have been welcomed by Māori to share the land and its bountiful resources, and the Treaty and the Principles extracted from both the script and the spirit of the Treaty, call non-Māori (us) to honour and protect the rights of the tangata whenua (people of the land) - the first peoples, the Indigenous peoples of NZ.”
The Treaty of Waitangi is a unique agreement that provides a process, framework, and space for Māori and non-Māori to negotiate how to live together. It is about partnership, respect, and mutual understanding. The Treaty principles are not just legal constructs; they are the embodiment of our commitment (our spirit) to work together as two peoples with distinct identities. This bill, pushing for a simplistic notion of equal rights under one government, fails to honour that commitment and the historical context from which it arose. As Riana Te Ngahue, Dame Jenny Shipley and Kassie Hartendorp have highlighted, this bill could have far-reaching negative implications for New Zealand’s social fabric, and it is for these reasons that I cannot support it.
Frank, Mal, and I firmly believe that honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi presents an opportunity for all New Zealanders to cultivate a healthier, more robust, and welcoming society for everyone in Aotearoa. The Treaty embodies the principles of partnership, respect, and mutual understanding, laying the groundwork for peaceful coexistence between Māori and non-Māori.
The proposed Treaty Principles Bill, however, maintains the historical trend of predominantly Pākehā individuals benefiting from a privileged society in Aotearoa. It falsely claims to provide Treaty principles for the benefit of all New Zealanders when, in reality, it reinforces existing disparities and inequities.
The current state of our economy, healthcare, education systems, crime rates, and social inequalities reflects the consequences of colonial leadership in New Zealand. To address these systemic issues and strive for better outcomes for all citizens, a co-governance approach rooted in Te Tiriti o Waitangi offers a more promising path. This approach acknowledges and upholds the covenant made by the Crown with Māori, fostering a more inclusive and equitable society that honours the Treaty’s original intent of partnership and shared prosperity.
Endnotes
[3] Email forwarded from Robbie Blakelock from OurActionStations
Māori Words
Te Tiriti (The Treaty of Waitangi), tino rangatiratanga ('highest chieftainship' or 'unqualified chieftainship', but is also translated as ‘absolute sovereignty’ or ‘self-determination’), tangata tiriti (people of the treaty), tangata whenua (people of the land)
Image: Dave and Denise Tims alongside some neighbours on the Alfriston Rd bridge supporting the hīkoi as they drove underneath on State Highway 1 on Wednesday 13 November 2024.
